Teachers' Pedagogical Systems and Grammar Teaching: A ...

9TESOL QUARTERLY Vol 32 No 1 Spring 1998

Teachersrsquo Pedagogical Systemsand Grammar TeachingA Qualitative StudySIMON BORGUniversity of Malta

Despite the centrality of grammar in L2 research and methodology overthe years the cognitive bases of teachersrsquo instructional decisions ingrammar teaching are relatively unexplored This interpretive studyfocuses on this issue by analysing the teaching of grammar in an L2classroom from the perspective of the personal pedagogical systemsmdashstores of beliefs knowledge theories assumptions and attitudesmdashthatplay a significant role in shaping teachersrsquo instructional decisions Theauthor examines the role of grammar teaching in the classroompractice of an experienced teacher of EFL and discusses the nature ofthe personal pedagogical system that influenced his practice In particu-lar the study illustrates the manner in which the teacherrsquos instructionaldecisions in teaching grammar were shaped by the interaction of hispedagogical system his educational and professional experiences andthe context of instruction The author argues that research intoteachersrsquo pedagogical systems can contribute to a fuller and morerealistic understanding of L2 grammar instruction

In the last 15 years educational research has provided ample supportfor the assertion that teachersrsquo classroom practices are determined to

a substantial degree by their personal pedagogical belief systems (Clarkamp Peterson 1986 Kagan 1992 Pajares 1992) More recently the leadprovided by this work has been taken up in the field of L2 teaching anda handful of studies have investigated the impact these pedagogicalsystemsmdashthe beliefs knowledge theories assumptions and attitudes thatteachers hold about all aspects of their workmdashhave on L2 teachersrsquoinstructional decisions (Burns 1996 Johnson 1994 Smith 1996D Woods 1996) Compared with the work carried out in mainstreameducation however ldquothe unique filter through which second languageteachers make instructional decisions choose instructional materialsand select certain instructional practices over othersrdquo (Johnson p 440)is still relatively unexplored In particular little attention has been paid

10 TESOL QUARTERLY

to L2 teachersrsquo perceptions of the role of grammar teaching1 in theirwork and to the manner in which instructional decisions regardinggrammar teaching are informed by teachersrsquo personal pedagogicalsystems Given the central position grammar has occupied in studies ofL2 acquisition (see Ellis 1994 for a review) and in discussions of L2teaching methodology (eg Batstone 1994 Bygate Tonkyn amp Williams1994) the lack of attention to the cognitive bases of teachersrsquo work ingrammar teaching represents a gap in the research agenda for L2teaching

Research into the psychological context (Munby 1983) of grammarteaching is also particularly important in view of the inconclusive natureof L2 acquisition studies of the best way to teach grammar L2 teachershave been offered a range of pedagogical options yet a major review ofthese has suggested that ldquoit is probably premature to reach any firmconclusions regarding what type of formal instruction works bestrdquo (Ellis1994 p 646) The teaching of grammar in the absence of well-foundedguidelines is like a landscape without bearings and research intoteachersrsquo personal pedagogical systems suggests that to cope in such ill-defined situations ldquoteachers create and internalise their own mapsrdquo(Kagan 1992 p 80) This article explores the nature of the maps L2teachers utilise in determining the role and nature of grammar teachingin their classroom practice

PURPOSE AND CONTEXT

The initial aim of the study was to provide an emic perspective on themanner in which an L2 teacherrsquos personal pedagogical system informedhis approach to grammar teaching This involved describing how theteacher approached grammar in his work and exploring the rationalebehind his decisions to do so During the course of the study however itbecame clear that the teacherrsquos pedagogical system could not be ad-equately understood without reference to the factors that influenced itsdevelopment and application and a focus on these factors was conse-quently added to my research agenda

The fieldwork was conducted in an English language institute inMalta a Mediterranean centre for TEFL that caters each year to over30000 students of a variety of European nationalities The schoolassigned students to levels (ranging from elementary to high intermedi-ate) using an in-house placement test and students on standard general

1 Throughout this article grammar teaching refers to instruction designed to enhancestudentsrsquo awareness of the morphosyntactic features of a language

TEACHERSrsquo PEDAGOGICAL SYSTEMS AND GRAMMAR TEACHING 11

English courses received 3 hours of instruction a day typically spending2ndash3 weeks at the school Classrooms were modernly furnished with desk-chairs (which were generally organised in a horseshoe formation)whiteboards overhead projectors and electric fans (Malta is a warmcountry) Teachers at this school were not obliged to follow specificsyllabuses or textbooks rather they were free to decide on the shape andcontent of their lessons and were encouraged to utilise the wide range ofcontemporary and less recent teaching materials available in the schoolrsquosresource room The teacher whose practice is discussed here was a 40-year-old native speaker of English who had been involved in TEFL forover 15 years and who held qualifications in TEFL at both the certificateand the diploma levels2 He was one of the most highly qualified andexperienced teachers in his institute and was chosen for this study on thebasis of his reputation as a professionally committed L2 teacher Thefieldwork for this study was conducted with a group of intermediate-level18- to 35-year-old EFL students from Germany Poland Switzerland andItaly During the fieldwork the size of the class observed fluctuatedbetween six and eight students

RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

The research I present here was conceived within an exploratory-interpretive paradigm (Grotjahn 1987) Within this framework the goalof research is to understand the inner perspectives on the meanings ofthe actions of those being studied It is characterised by an idiographicconceptual framework (ie which focuses on the meaning of particularevents) by its aim to generate rather than to verify theory (ie it doesnot set out to test a priori hypotheses) and by naturalistic rather thanexperimental research designs This approach to research views knowl-edge not as an objective reality that the researcher describes scientifi-cally rather it acknowledges the personally constructed nature of allknowledge (Bassey 1991) A consequence of this epistemology is thatfrom an exploratory-interpretive perspective research is conceived as atask of interpreting human action by understanding why people behavein the way they do Applied to the study of grammar teaching thisparadigm allows an exploration of how teachers approach grammar intheir work and an understanding from their perspective of the factorsbehind their instructional decisions

2 Details about these qualifications are provided in the course of the article Malta is a smallplace however and in order to protect the teacherrsquos anonymity I am unable to provide anyadditional specific information about his background

12 TESOL QUARTERLY

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis in the study were not linear but cyclicalwhich called for a sequential form of analysis (Delamont 1992 Tesch1990) In practice this means that data were collected and analyzedthroughout the period of fieldwork with each successive stage of datacollection being influenced by the analysis of the data already collected(in contrast a linear approach to data collection and analysis wouldcollect all the data before beginning to analyse them) This interactionbetween data collection and analysis emerges clearly in the descriptionbelow of the procedures I followed1 I first conducted a 1-hour preobservation interview with the teacher

in order to establish a profile of his educational background reasonsfor becoming a teacher experience of teaching and general viewsabout L2 teaching I conceived of the interview as a semistructuredconversation (Kvale 1996) that focused on particular themes (seeAppendix A) without being rigidly structured3 and in which my rolewas to interact with the teacher in order to explore in as open-minded a manner as possible the meaning he assigned to educa-tional and professional experiences in his life The interview wasrecorded and transcribed

2 The next stage of the study consisted of 15 hours of classroomobservations over a period of 2 weeks during which I obtained adetailed account of classroom events through qualitative field notesaudio recordings copies of all instructional materials and samplesof studentsrsquo written work My role in the classroom was that of anonparticipant observer (P Woods 1986)

3 I analysed the observational data after each lesson for key instruc-tional episodesmdashclassroom incidents that generated questions aboutthe rationale for the teacherrsquos approach to grammar The use of aparticular grammar teaching activity the explanation of a grammarrule a response to a studentrsquos question about grammar or a reactionto a studentrsquos grammatical error for example were all seen to be keyepisodes as they prompted questions through which I could gaininsight into the factors behind the teacherrsquos behaviour An analyticmemo recording the questions generated by the observational datawas produced after each lesson (see Appendix B for an example)

3 In interviewing of this type the researcher uses an interview schedule as a guide to thethemes that need to be discussed Question order and wording however are adapted to fit thespecific manner in which the interview develops In addition the interview may also cover issuesthat are not directly listed in the schedule but that may arise during the course of theconversation


Through these memos conceptual categories in the data began toemerge

4 A study of the categories identified in the analytic memos providedthe framework for two postobservation interviews with the teachereach lasting about an hour (see Appendix C for information on theinterview schedule) In order to gain access to the teacherrsquos thoughtsabout the issues included in these categories I presented him withkey episodes from his lessons and prompted him to elaborate onthem through a form of stimulated recall (Calderhead 1981) Theteacher talked about these episodes in a number of waysbull by commenting on what he was trying to do at a particular stage of

the lesson and whybull by responding to assertions I made about his practice on the basis

of what I had observed in the classroombull by talking about how a particular episode fitted into the structure

of his lesson andbull by explaining his decisions to make use of particular instructional

activities and materials in his work5 These interviews were also recorded and transcribed in full and all

three interviews were returned to the teacher who was asked (a) tocheck their accuracy (ie the extent to which the commentsreported in the interviews were his)4 and (b) to answer additionalquestions asking him to clarify or elaborate on issues we discussed inthe interviews The teacher turned in written answers to thesequestions with the transcripts These written responses were addedto the interview data and were of particular value in filling in whatwould have otherwise been gaps in my understanding of the teacherrsquoswork

6 At this stage the interview data became the focus of the analysisThrough a combination of manual and computerised strategies5

these data were initially coded according to a start list (Miles ampHuberman 1994) of conceptual categories derived from the inter-view schedules and the analytic memos based on the observationsData not accommodated by the start list generated several additionalcategories and through an iterative process of interview contentanalysis a structured list of categories emerged (see Appendix D)Summaries I wrote for each category provided at-a-glance access to

4 The teacher made some minor changes to the transcripts to clarify what he had said duringthe interviews

5 The coding searching and retrieval of the data was facilitated by the use of a qualitativedata analysis program called NUDIST (Qualitative Solutions and Research Pty 1995)

14 TESOL QUARTERLY

the central issues in the teacherrsquos commentary on his work andfacilitated the analysis of the relationships between categories Thesesummaries also reflected the crystallisation of many of the categoriesthat had emerged from the analytic memos earlier in the study

PRESENTATION OF DATA

The presentation of the data in this article has been influenced by abelief that interpretive research is best communicated in a format thatreflects the data collection and analysis procedures the research entailsAbove I outlined how in this study the analysis of teaching behaviourgenerated interview data that provided access to the teacherrsquos cognitionswhat follows maintains this relationship between the behavioural andcognitive components of the study Thus the presentation of the data isorganised around teaching behaviours that characterised the teacherrsquosapproach to grammar work I discuss these behaviours in turn withreference to the teacherrsquos own analytic commentary on them and it isthrough an analysis of this commentary that the key features of theteacherrsquos pedagogical system emerge6 This form of presentation mirrorsand makes transparent to readers the inductive processes of data analysisthat were central to this study it also ensures that all assertions in theaccount are clearly grounded in the data from which they emerged

Error Analysis

A recurrent mode of working with grammar employed by the teacherinvolved the analysis of studentsrsquo grammatical errors Episode 1 providesan example of this strategy in action The students had just finished anoral group-work activity during which the teacher was taking note of thelanguage errors the students made The teacher photocopied the sheeton which he was writing distributed copies of it to the students andasked them to discuss the questions on the sheet in groups This is whatthe students received

6 See Appendix C for a list of areas of classroom practice that informed the selection of theteaching behaviours I illustrate in this account The features of the teacherrsquos pedagogical systemI discuss here are taken from Appendix D A full discussion of all the categories listed inAppendixes C and D is not possible in the space available hence this article focuses onrecurrent teaching behaviours that provide insight into the predominant features of theteacherrsquos pedagogical system


Episode 11 If you had two wishes what would they beCan you analyse the structureDoes lsquohadrsquo refer to the pastIs the structure similar in your language

2 Which is correct(a) CouldCan you tell me what do you want(b) CouldCan you tell me what you want

When do we use an interrogative formWhen donrsquot we use an interrogative form (EO1164ndash167)7

Error analysis of this kind occurred in each of the lessons I observed andthere are two issues to explore here firstly the rationale for basinggrammar work on studentsrsquo errors and secondly the factors behind theparticular instructional strategy the teacher adopted With reference tothe first issue the teacherrsquos reasons for using studentsrsquo errors as the basisof grammar work were quite simple Such errors provided the obviousstarting place for designing a student-centred language programmeHowever he added that

itrsquos also a little bit of a packaging exercise as well in that if I can show themvisually on a piece of paper that they are having problems with certain areasthat in some way validates even more the language focus stuff that theyrsquoregoing to do during the course (EI217)

Basing grammar work on studentsrsquo errors was thus a strategy theteacher used to justify such work in the studentsrsquo eyes In addition theteacher felt that error analysis of this type would allow him to validate thefluency work in the course

We do a lot of fluency work and sometimes learnersrsquo expectations of thelanguage classroom differ from this reality Giving them opportunities tofocus on accuracy in language work that springs from (or is related to) thesefluency activities helps these types of learners to accept more enthusiasticallythe fluency activities (EI3245)

At least partly then his aim in providing a grammar focus based onstudentsrsquo errors was to preempt concerns students might have developedabout the course if such work had been absent from his practice His

7 References to data follow these conventions S1 S2 SS and so on refer to individual orgroups of students EO refers to observation data EI refers to interview data Each extract alsocontains a reference to its location within the data corpus (eg EI112 is Interview 1 Paragraph12 EO530ndash60 is Observation 5 Paragraphs 30ndash60) SB is myself

16 TESOL QUARTERLY

beliefs about studentsrsquo expectations had a powerful influence on hisbehaviour here and did in fact emerge in the study as a pervasiveinfluence on his approach to grammar teaching Very interestinglythough the teacher also indicated that the grammar points he fed backto students during error analysis activities were not simply limited toerrors they had made on the day

Occasionally when Irsquom writing down errors theyrsquore making during speakingfluency well first of all Irsquom discarding a lot of slips and a lot of errors which Idonrsquot think are especially important and I occasionally slip in somethingwhich they may not have made that day but is often made by students at thatlevel and I know instinctively and from experience that that is somethingwhich they need to come to grips with or they want to come to grips with(EI2109)

Deciding which grammar points to include in error analysis activitiesthen was not just a question of writing down studentsrsquo mistakes itinvolved professional judgments about appropriate issues to focus onjudgments that the teacher felt he was able to make on the basis of hisexperience as an L2 teacher

In terms of instructional strategy the error analysis activities in theteacherrsquos work were designed to encourage students to investigategrammar The questions in Episode 1 prompted students to think aboutgrammar in different waysmdashto analyse the form and meaning of astructure compare the structure with their L1 make grammaticalityjudgments and inductively formulate a grammar rule In discussing thisinvestigative approach to grammar teaching the teacher articulated avery clear rationale

I think itrsquos all part of a learner-centred approach to teaching based on thebelief that people have a brain have a lot of knowledge are able to workthings out for themselves and the belief that if they are able to work thingsout for themselves itrsquos more likely to be internalised rather than having itexplained to them I think that gives them a sense of achievement andthis sense of achievement that students acquire is for me perhaps anotherfactor of what a successful lesson is (EI2101ndash105)

According to the teacher thinking about grammar facilitates learningbecause it addresses both the cognitive and the affective needs of thestudents cognitively the teacher believed that inductively learned mate-rial is etched deeper in studentsrsquo minds affectively he felt that learningbenefits from the sense of achievement thinking tasks can create instudents In discussing his beliefs about inductive teaching the teacheralso shed light on the contribution of his professional training as ateacher to the development of his personal pedagogical system


In terms of the greatest influences on me in my development as a teacherthere were my two tutors on the CTEFLA8 and the Diploma courses On theCTEFLA my tutor was so good at getting us to reach conclusions ourselveswithout hardly saying anything himself The tutor on the Diploma likewisepossessed this ability of eliciting without hardly telling us anything himself Idonrsquot think he used to have an answer in his head which he wanted us toreach he really did want us to reach our own conclusions I think they werethe greatest influences on me and I found that when I taught I even copiedthe gestures they used to use I was like a clone of them The CTEFLA wasthe greatest learning experience Irsquove ever had in my life It emphasisedlearner centredness and the importance of motivation it taught me so muchabout staying in the background and giving the learners their own space Ithelped me to change my concept of what a teacher should be doing in theclassroom Inductive teaching was a revelation to me and it really excited meIt helped me to start listening to students The Diploma was a refinement ofall we did in the CTEFLA (EI150ndash60)

This extract depicts vividly the powerful influence formal training hadon his development as a teacher His tutors affected him deeply throughtheir skill at illustrating in their own work the methodological practicesthey wanted to pass on to trainees His beliefs in the value of student-centred inductive work were thus firmly established during his initialtraining and later confirmed by further professional education

In discussing his use of grammar activities in which the students wereencouraged to investigate the language the teacher also explained that

I actually think people enjoy the intellectual challenge sometimes to thinkabout grammar to think about how the language falls together and to workout possible solutions for themselves and itrsquos also I find a useful way ofsometimes pacing a lesson I think thatrsquos quite important actually I think oneof the main reasons why I have language focus sessions in a lesson is to paceit a little bit as well more reflective time (EI257)

Further reasons for using thinking tasks emerge here Anotheraffective issuemdashthat students enjoy thinking about grammarmdashhad an

8 The Royal Society of Arts Certificate in Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Adults(CTEFLA now Certificate in English Language Teaching to AdultsmdashCELTA) is an internation-ally recognised initial TEFL qualification The teacher did this as a 4-week intensive full-timecourse The diploma the teacher refers to is the Diploma in Teaching English as a ForeignLanguage to Adults (DTEFLA now Diploma in English Language Teaching to AdultsmdashDELTA) The teacher did this as a 1-year programme The certificate program had a strongpractical bias with daily practice teaching real L2 students an emphasis on classroommanagement skills and practical demonstrations of communicative techniques of L2 teachingAccording to the teacher the DTEFLA refined issues raised at the certificate level and focusedon more theoretical issues as well (eg cognitive styles and learning strategies) In assessing thelevel of detail the teacher provides about these courses during this account readers shouldkeep in mind that he completed them around 13 and 8 years respectively prior to this study

18 TESOL QUARTERLY

important bearing on the teacherrsquos decisions An important concept isalso that of reflective time This not only provided the cognitive andaffective benefits already mentioned it also had a classroom manage-ment role in that it allowed the teacher to vary the pace of a lessonClassroom management issues continue to surface throughout theaccount as a shaping influence on the teacherrsquos work in grammarteaching

Reference to Studentsrsquo L1

Another strategy the teacher regularly used in teaching grammar wasto encourage students to refer to their L1 Question 1 in Episode 1 was aminor case of this Episode 2 below is a more extended example (thestudents had just finished a pair-work speaking activity and the teacherhad asked them whether they had had any problems)

Episode 2S3 says she has a problem using a particular structure ldquoHave been

continuous present is itrdquo ldquoThe name doesnrsquot matterrdquo says the teacher andhe proceeds to write the following on the board

Je suis ici depuis deux joursIch bin hier seit zwei TageSono qui da due giorniI came here two days agoI _______________ 2 days

The teacher asks ldquoCan you complete the sentencerdquo S2 says ldquoI have beenhere for 2 daysrdquo ldquoIn many European languagesrdquo the teacher explains ldquoapresent tense is used where in English the present perfect is used We can saylsquoI am here for two weeksrsquo but it has a different meaning it means lsquonow andin the futurersquordquo (EO198ndash133)

I asked the teacher for his opinion about the contribution to learningEnglish grammar the studentsrsquo L1 could make

Well when I started out using the studentsrsquo mother tongue was justanathema It was considered counterproductive I like to see patternsmyself and in my own language learning often if I see something whichis similar to my own language I just find it easier to take on board And Ithink at least as far as Western European languages are concerned ourlanguages in terms of patterns of grammar have probably got far far more incommon than what they donrsquot share Irsquove seen it so often when students aremade aware that for example conditionals exist in their language in almostexactly the same way often thatrsquos just been an eye-opener for them as well Soasking them to perceive to look at patterns and relate them to their ownlanguage Irsquove often found that very useful (EI3131)


The teacher joined the profession at the height of the communicativeboom (the late 1970sndashearly 1980s) a time when the use of studentsrsquo L1in the EFL classroom was virtually outlawed A number of factorsthough had enabled him to change his position His awareness oflearning strategies that worked for him seems to have been importanthere classroom experience had an equally important effect on shapinghis pedagogical systemmdashldquoIrsquove seen it so oftenrdquo were his wordsmdashand heexpanded on this point when he explained

I must say that a lot of this stuff regarding using the studentsrsquo own languageI actually havenrsquot discussed with a lot of people and I havenrsquot read muchliterature about it a lot of it Irsquove arrived at conclusions on my ownthrough experience but it is an evolution itrsquos where I am at the moment(EI3147)

This comment suggests that the teacherrsquos personal pedagogical systemwas informed by his perceptions of what worked well in the classroomHis observations here also indicate an awareness on his part of thedynamic nature of this system Further support for the notion of anevolving pragmatic pedagogical system that guided the teacherrsquos actionsin teaching grammar continues to emerge in the discussion below

Grammatical Terminology

Explicit discussions of grammatical issues were another recurrentfeature of the teacherrsquos work Both the teacher and the students usedgrammatical terminology quite freely in these discussions suggestingthat the teacher had positive feelings about the role grammaticalmetalanguage played in L2 learning However there were two particularincidents that questioned this initial assessment The first occurred inEpisode 2 above when a student asked about the name of a tense andthe teacher said ldquoThe name doesnrsquot matterrdquo The second culminating inthe statement ldquoItrsquos not necessary to know these wordsrdquo is presentedbelow In this episode the teacher was trying to elicit the correct form forthe sentence ldquoDo you want that I come back homerdquo (The students hadproduced this incorrect sentence during an oral activity they had justcompleted)

Episode 3T What do you say if you offer someone a cup of teaSS Do you want a cup of teaT What do you say if you invite someone to the cinemaSS Do you want to go to the cinema

20 TESOL QUARTERLY

T With a verb want takes to and we can follow it with an object if therersquossomeone else [Some of the students look puzzled]So whatrsquos the correct sentence

SS Do you want me to come back home (The teacher now writes thissentence on board)

T If I say subject object do you understand[S1 says she does not some of the other students say they do]T Want is the verb Who wantsS YouT So you is the subject Me is on the other side of the verb Me is the

object Itrsquos not necessary to know these words just to understandgrammar books (EO490ndash93)

On the basis of these two incidents I prompted the teacher to discussthe factors that influenced his use of grammatical terminology

I think the students actually enjoy an intellectual spot in the lesson where theycan reflect about language and consider language and where they canactually talk about grammar if there is an opportunity to do so and themajority of the people are included in the discussion and nobody feelsalienated by it in any way I think I would take opportunities to do that(EI377ndash82)

The teacherrsquos comments here reveal his concern for the effect the useof grammatical terminology may have on the students and it is in thelight of this concern that the two incidents in Episodes 2 and 3 makesense

I think what was happening there was that I felt that they might have beenmore confused or somehow threatened by the labels and I just wanted to getto the crux of the language point without using terminology which would insome way threaten or frighten them (EI383)

In telling the students that ldquothe name doesnrsquot matterrdquo or that ldquoitrsquos notnecessary to know these wordsrdquo then the teacher was not implying thathe felt terminology had no role to play in the L2 learning process ratherhe was making real-time decisions in response to potential complicationshe thought the use of terminology in those particular situations wouldhave caused This illustrates how the teacherrsquos behaviour was interac-tively shaped by his perceptions of the studentsrsquo cognitiveaffective stateduring grammar teaching

In the course of our conversation the teacher also identified ways inwhich he felt that a knowledge of grammatical terminology in studentsfacilitated his work It provided an economical and shared means ofcommunication about language it facilitated diagnostic work and itequipped the students to function more competently as autonomous


investigators of language This final point was high on the teacherrsquosagenda for his students and he often assigned tasks such as those inEpisode 1 as optional homework research before students discussedthem together in class

The pedagogical system that shaped the teacherrsquos approach to gram-mar then included the above beliefs about the role of grammaticalterminology in the L2 classroom His views on this aspect of L2instruction however had not always been so positive When he was firsttrained

We were told never to use grammatical labels and to tell students that it wouldall come together naturally as a result of the communicative activities theydid (EI162)

Earlier in this account the teacher commented on the profound effecthis initial training had on his practice yet the views he held aboutgrammatical terminology were in stark contrast to those his training hadinstilled This radical change in the teacherrsquos views was sparked off byfurther professional training

When I did the Diploma the work we did on learning styles helped mebecome more aware of the fact that different learners may learn moreeffectively in different ways so that now Irsquom more aware of the need to takeinto account the different learning styles a group of students are likely tohave (EI148)

A significant professional experiencemdashbecoming aware of the notion oflearning stylesmdashprovided him with the insight that enabled him toreview the ldquodonrsquot worry about grammar itrsquoll all come together approachrdquo(EI1144) he had adopted early in his career it also enabled him tomake sense of negative experiences that he had had earlier in hiscareermdashbut that had no immediate effect on his practicemdashin whichstudents had complained about this approach9

Grammar Rules10

The explicit discussions of grammar in the teacherrsquos work alsoprompted me to investigate his beliefs about the role that grammar

9 Before he was aware of the notion of learning styles the teacher actually thought that thestudents who disagreed with his grammarless approach to teaching were simply being difficult

10 The previous section focused on the factors behind the teacherrsquos decision to use or not touse grammatical terminology in his work this section analyses the procedures through whichthe teacher established grammar rules in his lessons and the extent to which he presented therules to students as definitive truths about the language

22 TESOL QUARTERLY

rulesmdashdescriptive generalisations about the form meaning and use ofgrammatical itemsmdashplayed in his practice Episode 4 provides the basisof the discussion of this issue The sentence When do you come back homewas on the board and the teacher had asked the students to correct it

Episode 4S3 Does the question refer to the futureT Yes it doesS3 When are you coming back homeT What does that meanS3 Itrsquos a plan[On the board the teacher writes]

When do you plan to come back homehave you decided

S4 Is When will you come back home correctT [to the class] What do you thinkS3 Irsquom not sure When you ask with will it means she has just decidedThe teacher explains that normally this is true but that the problem with

the future is that it is very complex ldquoAs a help not as a rulerdquo the teacher tellsher that when and will are not used together ldquoAnother guiderdquo the teachersays ldquois that will is sometimes used to talk about the future but perhaps thereare other more common ways of doing sordquo (EO413ndash18)

One point that emerges here is that the teacher did not preempt thediscussion by telling the students what the rules are He promptedstudents to think about the issue under focus and redirected individualstudentsrsquo questions to the rest of the class In keeping with the approachto grammar illustrated above the teacher aimed to elicit the rulethrough an interactive class discussion rather than simply supplying therule himself

I find that when I learn languages I like finding out about rules myself Ithelps me if I can perceive patterns it really helps me And I think thatrsquos truefor many students and I think itrsquos part of their expectations too And I see itas part of my role to help them to become aware of language rules bothgrammatical and phonological and lexical whenever possible yes And lyingbehind that is the rationale that if they can be guided towards a formulationof a rule through largely their own endeavours it is more likely to beinternalised than if it was explained to them (EI155ndash57)

It is worth pointing out that the teacherrsquos belief in the value ofencouraging students to make sense of grammar ldquolargely through theirown endeavoursrdquo did not imply an unwillingness on his part to providedirect guidance where he felt it was needed This emerges clearly in thenext extract in which the teacher was responding to my query about the


extent to which he felt responsible for providing students with knowl-edge about the language

I think it is part of my job [and] of course it is normally part of studentsrsquoexpectations I think that also if I pointed them off in directions in which theycould investigate further the language and deepen their knowledge of thelanguage then yes that would be helpful But I think that at times theclassroom situation having a teacher there who has been trained perhaps tohelp it to become clearer for all the students I think there is a place for that(SB for giving knowledge) For leading students to a situation where theyperceive that they need this knowledge and want this knowledge and tryingto lead them to an awareness of it themselves and providing the knowledge ifthey canrsquot get to it themselves Yes thatrsquos all part of providing knowledgeWhether they discover it for themselves through tasks Irsquove designed orwhether I explain the grammar to them I think it amounts to the same thingI am providing knowledge (EI342ndash43)11

The teacherrsquos commitment to discovery-oriented work in grammarteaching did not prevent him from being responsive to the realities ofclassroom life Thus there were times when notwithstanding his effortsstudents were not able to reach useful conclusions about grammar ontheir own and in such cases he was willing to assume responsibility forproviding this knowledge There are clear examples of this in theepisodes from his practice cited above

In Episode 4 the teacher provided the students with ldquoa help not arulerdquo he also used the term a guide in giving the students advice on whento use when and will on another occasion he gave the students a ldquo90rdquorule at the end of a discussion on embedded questions I asked theteacher to comment on his behaviour in these episodes and heexplained the 90 case as follows

I was covering myself I think I made the rule up as formulated like that thereand then I think based on something which had happened in class and Ididnrsquot feel confident enough to say that is the rule without exceptions So Iwas just covering myself if they came up with an example which that didnrsquotapply to so it was useful to term it in terms of a guideline and a help ratherthan a rigid rule (EI363)

The teacherrsquos approach to grammar was largely unplanned that is hetook decisions about what language points to focus on interactively (asopposed to preactively) usually on the basis of problems students had

11 The contrast between the conception of providing knowledge embedded in my originalquestion (ie directly explaining) and that explicated by the teacher (ie both eliciting andexplaining) is indicative of the potential of research of this type for revealing teachersrsquo personalconceptions of what grammar teaching is and what it involves

24 TESOL QUARTERLY

during lessons (all the episodes presented in this account originated inthis manner) This approach to grammar teaching often led to im-promptu discussions of grammar points for which the teacher did notalways have what he considered a watertight rule12mdashhelps and guideswere a form of insurance in such situations Guides were also useful theteacher explained when rules had several exceptions that he did notwant to burden the students with as well as when he felt the whole rulewas beyond the studentsrsquo current level of understanding He elaboratedon this last point in his next comment

I think there is often a significant difference between the immediate aim of apart of a live lesson and the written explanation of a grammar rule in agrammar reference book The teacher who is under constraints of time andwho is well aware of what herhis students can deal with orallyaurally at amoment in time often needs to select and modify grammatical informationin a way that a reference book doesnrsquot need to (EI3230)

The teacherrsquos perceptions of the studentsrsquo readiness for learning at anypoint in the lesson then influenced his decision to provide them withuser-friendly versions of grammatical rules The teacher talked about thisin terms of ldquoconscious censorshiprdquo (EI373) through which he avoidedexposing students to detailed explanations of rules if he felt these wouldconfuse them

Practising Grammar

Another mode of teaching grammar that emerged in the teacherrsquoswork involved the use of practice activities in which students wereencouraged to use (rather than investigate or talk about) specificgrammatical items Such activities were an integral part of the teacherrsquosapproach to grammar

The underlying principle of everything is that if yoursquore going to have alanguage focus and therersquos going to be conscious language learning in theclassroom then I think I would do practice activities as well So theyrsquovereached awareness theyrsquove come to a conclusion about a rule then they needsome kind of practice of that rule Thatrsquos the underlying principle there

12 What he considered is the key phrase here his behaviour was influenced by his ownperceptions of his knowledge about grammar and knowing the answers gave him theconfidence to bounce studentsrsquo questions about grammar back to the class when he wasuncertain however he used words like guide or help asked students for some time to researchthe issue or else provided a direct response without encouraging students to discuss the issueany further This last kind of behaviour though was atypical and I only observed one instanceof it


as a general principle I give learners controlled (if possible communicative)practice when it comes to accuracy work (EI3203ndash248)

In discussing Question 2 in Episode 1 the students had analysed andmade explicit a rule about embedded questions (eg tell me what youwant as opposed to what do you want) The episode below describes thepractice activity that followed this analysis

Episode 5ldquoChoose someone you want to find out more about and write questions

without tell me which you want to ask this personrdquo the teacher explains Thestudents work on their questions for a few minutes The teacher movesaround and monitors what they are doing He also assists students who ask forhelp When the students have finished writing their questions the teacherexplains ldquoWhen you are asked a question try to answer as fully as possibleAnd try and ask the questions yoursquove written by using phrases like tell mebefore the question wordrdquo The students stand up find the person they wantto talk to and ask and answer questions (eg ldquoTell me what your favouritefood isrdquo) (EO247ndash58)

The practice activities in the teacherrsquos work shared certain character-istics that are illustrated in this episode First of all as the teacher notedin his comments above they occurred after a grammar item had beendiscussed and a rule of some sort had been established Second thepractice was oral not written13 Third the students had some choice ofwhat to say (ie they were never simply repeating sentences provided bythe teacher or by an exercise) Fourth the practice revolved aroundissues the teacher felt were of relevance to the students (eg in Episode5 they practised questions while getting to know each other better)

One example of grammar practice in the teacherrsquos work occurredafter the class discussion of the object pronouns in Episode 3 Theteacher wrote the sentence Do you want _____ to come back home on theboard and did a very quick round in which students were asked to repeatthe sentence using different pronouns (me him her us them) The wholeactivity lasted a minute or two I asked the teacher about this episodebecause it seemed somewhat traditional in comparison with the student-centred inductive meaning-oriented approach to grammar I had seenin his work His comments threw further light on a basic factor behindhis approach to grammar

13 There was one example of written grammar practice in the teacherrsquos work but it wasassigned as homework In discussing written grammar activities the teacher identified threereasons for using themmdashconsolidation diagnostics and importantly giving the studentssomething that they felt comfortable with on the basis of their previous experiences of L2learning

26 TESOL QUARTERLY

What I also use is change of pace activities and I remember the one about thedrill Do you want me Do you want him it was a stimulus-response behaviouristapproach and I just felt it was appropriate at that time to somehow jazz upincrease the energy in the lesson so I used that technique rather than givingthem a written exercise or something quieter to do So considerations ofclassroom pace are also primary there sometimes in the type of activity I getthe students to practise for a language point wersquove discussed I think thatrsquosone of the prime considerations for the type of activity I choose (EI3203ndash207)

Classroom management issues had a powerful influence on the teacherrsquosinstructional decisions in grammar teaching thus in this case he felt anenergising practice activity was necessary even though the activity re-flected a ldquostimulus-response behaviourist approachrdquo In discussing thisepisode the teacher provided further insight into the experientialinfluences on the development of his personal pedagogical system

Irsquove come to look at certain aspects of the traditional methods I experiencedas a learner and today Irsquom willing to try them out with learners in my ownclassrooms which is something I wouldnrsquot have done a few years ago Today Irsquom more aware of the fact that learners have different learning stylesand that some aspects of traditional language learning can be put to good usein the communicative classroom As long as I can put these traditionalactivities into some kind of context Irsquom OK And for many students itrsquossomething they can relate to because itrsquos the kind of language learning worktheyrsquore used to Itrsquos taken me a while to come to realise it but there werethings that I enjoyed when I was a language learner which I feel more willingto try out in my own work today (EI144)

The teacherrsquos own foreign language learning experiences were them-selves of the traditional grammar translation type ldquoI enjoyed thismethodology I was good at itrdquo (EI140) the teacher recalled yet earlierin his career close adherence to the communicative principles he hadbeen trained in meant that such activities were not part of his classroomrepertoire A heightened awareness of learning styles and of his ownsuccess as a language learner however over time had made him willingto utilise more traditional activities in his work In fact a central featureof his development as a teacher was the formation of a personalpedagogy in which aspects of traditionally exclusive approaches to L2teaching coexisted and were drawn upon according to his perceptions ofthe demands of specific instructional contexts

Grammar and Communicative Ability

Given that the overall focus of the teacherrsquos classroom practice was ondeveloping fluent communicatively competent users of English I asked


the teacher what role he felt grammar teaching played in enabling himto reach that goal

Irsquom not entirely convinced that any focus on accuracy in the classroom hasany effect on studentsrsquo fluency in general Irsquom trying not to exclude thepossibility perhaps the probability that formal language focus at some pointgets transferred into language which is acquired by the student I wondersometimes whether Irsquom also not covering myself with the students by sayinglistenmdashif we do fluency activities all the time Irsquom not sure how well thatwould go down with the students basically So I feel that these are theirexpectations and I will do accuracy work I donrsquot necessarily believe thatitrsquos going to help them Irsquove done this present perfect umpteen times with amillion people I still believe that nothing Irsquove ever done in a classroomconsciously with students language focus has actually helped them toacquire the present perfect for example (EI245ndash53)

The teacherrsquos comment here may come as a surprise in the light of hisapproach to grammar explored in this account However consideringthe different reasons he gave for encouraging students to think abouttalk about and practise grammar the absence of any direct reference toimproved fluency does become clear He seemed to believe there was apossibility that formal language work did enhance studentsrsquo ability to usethe grammar studied in communicative speech but the weight ofexperience (ldquoumpteen times with a million peoplerdquo) suggested other-wise Similar sentiments were evident in the teacherrsquos comments on thevalue of the written grammar exercises he occasionally assigned

I think probably unconsciously now consciously that the main reason why Igive it [written grammar] is ldquoLook this is grammar this is what you perceiveas grammar wersquore doing this too as wellrdquo (EI3195)

Appeasing studentsrsquo concerns by showing them he was doing somegrammar work was really what mattered for the teacher classroommanagement issues were also important As for improving the studentsrsquoability to use the grammar taught for communication it might occur butthe teacher was not very optimistic about this and it was not the primarymotive behind his decision to focus on grammar

DISCUSSION THE PEDAGOGICAL SYSTEM

In this section I discuss the outcomes of this study in the light of theeducational literature on teachersrsquo pedagogical systems and examine theimplications of such research for expanding current understandings ofL2 grammar teaching

28 TESOL QUARTERLY

The Components of the Pedagogical System

The literature on teachersrsquo pedagogical systems has identified a rangeof issues teachers have complex interacting beliefs about These issuesinclude beliefs about students themselves (ie teachersrsquo self-percep-tions) the subject matter being taught teaching and learning curriculaschools the teacherrsquos role materials classroom management andinstructional activities (Burns 1992 Carter amp Doyle 1987 Cronin-Jones1991 Dirkx amp Spurgin 1992 Doolittle Dodds amp Placek 1993 GrossmanWilson amp Shulman 1989 Munby 1982 Olson amp Singer 1994 Smith1996 Taylor 1987) This study supported this notion of complexpersonalised pedagogical systems and illustrated the manner in whichsuch a system impinged on the work of an L2 teacher with specificreference to the teaching of grammar

In talking about his work the teacher revealed a network of interact-ing and potentially conflicting beliefs about a wide variety of issuesrelated not only to L2 teaching but also to teaching and learning ingeneral Thus despite his belief that formal grammar work probablymade no direct contribution to studentsrsquo communicative ability heincluded such work in his practice for the following reasons1 Especially early in the course grammar work is a form of packaging

designed to preempt studentsrsquo concerns about the kind of coursethey are getting

2 Grammar work based on studentsrsquo errors makes it more relevant tothe students

3 Grammar work based on errors the students make during fluencyactivities validates the latter in the studentsrsquo eyes

4 Students enjoy the intellectual challenge inductive grammar workprovides this approach to grammar also enhances studentsrsquo sense ofachievement

5 Grammar activities allow the teacher to vary the pace of the lesson6 Grammar work in which students can focus on their own errors

makes the students more aware of these errors and hence morecapable of self-correcting in the future

7 Grammar practice consolidates studentsrsquo understanding of grammarpreviously focused on it can also serve as a diagnostic tool enablingthe teacher to identify grammar areas the students need more workon

8 Grammar work helps students perceive patterns in the languagewhich can facilitate learning Encouraging an awareness of grammarrules or asking students to compare their L1 to English can thus beuseful in this respect


These findings provide the kind of insight into grammar-related instruc-tional decisions that the field of L2 pedagogy currently lacks but that hasclear potential for broadening current conceptions of the processesinvolved in L2 grammar instruction I elaborate on this potential in thefinal part of this article

The Role of Experience in Shaping the Pedagogical System

This study identified ways in which a teacherrsquos pedagogical system wasshaped by educational and professional experiences in his life Incontrast to the findings of several studies into the effects of training onthe beliefs and classroom practices of beginning teachers (Brookhart ampFreeman 1992 Goodman 1988 Weinstein 1990) the teacher in thisstudy was profoundly influenced by his initial training This experienceintroduced him to communicative methodology and developed in himbeliefs in student-centredness that had an immediate and lasting impacton his practice and that were powerful enough to blot out at least earlyin his career beliefs about the value of explicit grammar work instilled byhis own experience as a learner This too is interesting in the light ofresearch suggesting that the power of pretraining beliefs is at least asstrong as or even actually outweighs the effects of formal teachereducation in defining beginning teachersrsquo classroom practice (Goodman1988) In this study the beliefs instilled by the teacherrsquos initial trainingwere so firmly rooted that negative classroom experiences early in hiscareer (eg studentsrsquo complaints about the lack of explicit grammar)led to no immediate change in his work

The powerful impact of the teacherrsquos initial training on his personalpedagogical system may have been due to a number of factors One ofthese may have been the nature of the course which was an intensivefull-time 4-week programme (most of the literature I have cited is basedon longer programmes) A second factor was definitely the teacherrsquosadmiration for his trainers as well as their skill in blending coursecontent and training processes by practising what they preached (iethey were reflexive trainersmdashBritten 1985) Thirdly the course had astrong practical orientation with daily teaching practice sessions In thisway the precepts of communicative teaching were strongly reinforcedThe novelty the training experiences represented for the teacher anopen mind and a willingness to learn on his part also probablycontributed to making his initial training such an influential learningexperience The teacherrsquos in-service training especially by introducinghim to the notion of learning styles also had an important formativeeffect on his personal pedagogical system An awareness of this conceptenabled the teacher to review and make sense of negative experiences

30 TESOL QUARTERLY

earlier in his career It also allowed him to become aware that thestrategies that functioned for him as an L2 learner could also be put togood use in his work even though they were generally not consideredappropriate in a communicative classroom And it also initiated in himthe process of radically redefining the beliefs about grammar teachingthat had been instilled by his initial training The process he wentthrough supports the claims made by studies that drawing upon theconceptual change hypothesis (Posner Strike Hewson amp Gertzog1982) have argued that in-service training will have a lasting impact onteachersrsquo classroom practice only when it addresses their existing beliefs(Briscoe 1991 Crawley amp Salyer 1995)

Ongoing classroom experience continued the development in theteacher of a personalised pragmatically oriented system of pedagogicalbeliefs and practical theories that was powerfully influenced by hisperceptions of what worked well but that in turn served as a filterthrough which he processed continuing experience His beliefs aboutthe use of studentsrsquo L1 in grammar teaching for example were basedpurely on experience This system of beliefs also provided the teacherwith a form of expert knowledge (Berliner 1987) about L2 teaching thatinfluenced his instructional decisions for example the teacher hadmental representations of typical students (schemata) that allowed himto make predictions about studentsrsquo linguistic needs expectations andexperience even before he met them Expert knowledge also informedhis interactive decisions about which grammar points to include in erroranalysis activities and which to ignore Such decisions called for knowl-edge not simply about grammar (ie linguistic knowledge) but alsoabout the grammar that the students needed or wanted and hence weremost likely to benefit from

Context and the Pedagogical System

It is also worth noting that despite numerous studies into ldquothe socialpsychological and environmental realities of the school and classroom[which] mitigate or preclude the implementation of belief systems indecision makingrdquo (Kinzer 1988 p 359) external contextual factors didnot appear to interfere with the implementation of the teacherrsquospedagogical system He consistently discussed his work with reference tohis beliefs and his perceptions of the classroom and never rationalisedhis behaviour in terms of external forces he had no control over such asparents principalsrsquo requirements the school society studentsrsquo character-istics curriculum mandates classroom and school layout school poli-cies standardised tests and the availability of resources (Beach 1994Brickhouse 1990 Briscoe 1991 Brown amp Wendel 1993 Carlgren amp


Lindblad 1991 Konopak amp Williams 1994 Tabachnick amp Zeichner1986 Taylor 1987 Wilson Konopak amp Readence 1992) This is not todeny of course that basic choices in the selection of content forexample must have been influenced by student-related variables such asage and level

Instructional decisions also need to be considered in terms of internalcontextual factors that in contrast to external givens surface during thecourse of instruction itself The teacher in this study was sensitive to suchfactors such as evidence of student understanding and he seemed tohave built into his personal pedagogical system ways of responding tothese factors and even preempting potential complications they couldcause A clear example of this was the packaging exercise he did early onin the course this was designed to appease studentsrsquo concerns about thenature of the programme by showing them that during the course hewould pay attention to the accuracy of their language Decisions abouthow directive he needed to be when grammar was being analysed werealso influenced by the extent to which he felt students could usefullyreach inductive conclusions about the grammar under study Similarlydecisions about the use of grammatical terminology were also condi-tioned by his perceptions of how positively students responded toexplicit talk about grammar Of course the notion that teachersrsquoinstructional decisions are influenced by their real-time perceptions ofclassroom events is nothing new in itself however with specific referenceto L2 grammar teaching it does raise interesting questions about thebasis on which teachers decide to explain or elicit to provide compre-hensive or simplified grammar rules to respond to studentsrsquo questionsabout grammar and to react to their grammar errors for example

IMPLICATIONS

By focusing on teaching processes (rather than outcomes)14 this studyrepresents a conceptual shift in research on L2 grammar instruction thatgives new direction to the investigation and understanding of this facetof L2 pedagogy The insight this study has provided into the behavioural

14 In this study I did not investigate the relationship between the teacherrsquos practice and whatstudents actually learned about grammar This does not imply that the analysis of suchrelationships is not congruent with the kind of work I am promoting here or that the study ofteaching effectiveness is not important for the TESL profession Data that document studentsrsquoperceptions of or reactions to the practices that derive from a teacherrsquos pedagogical system canprovide valuable insights into the processes involved in effective L2 grammar teaching It isimportant however for the study of learning outcomes not to become divorced from anunderstanding of teaching processes as it did in earlier process-product studies of L2 grammarinstruction

32 TESOL QUARTERLY

and psychological dimensions of grammar teachingmdashissues not ad-dressed by traditional approaches to research in this fieldmdashsuggests thatcontinuing work of this kind has a central role to play in providingrealistic accounts of what L2 grammar teaching actually involves

Such accounts can be of particular benefit to L2 teacher educatorswho at present can at best introduce trainees to pedagogical options ingrammar teaching but cannot illustrate when how and why L2 teachersin real classrooms draw upon these options The current understandingof this aspect of L2 teaching is so limited that L2 teacher educators donot even know whether the pedagogical options presented to prospec-tive teachers bear any resemblance to practising teachersrsquo understand-ings of grammar teaching The form of inquiry I have illustrated hereaddresses this problem by providing teacher educators with detailedauthentic descriptions of teachersrsquo thinking and action

The stimulating portraits of L2 classroom practice that emerge fromstudies like this one can also be used in professional developmentcontexts not as prescriptive models of exemplary teaching but to inspireother teachers to analyse their own beliefs (Clark 1986) and to findsupport for or review the practical arguments (Fenstermacher 1986) onwhich their own grammar teaching practices are based The relationshipbetween research and practice in grammar teaching implied here is thusno longer the unidirectional one assumed by process-product studies ofthis area of L2 instruction (ie that research informs practice) rather itbecomes a reciprocal relationship in which research is grounded in therealities of classroom practice but at the same time provides teacherswith insights into teaching through which they can critically examineand hence improve their own practice

In conclusion studies of the pedagogical systems on which teachersbase grammar instruction have much to offer the field of L2 teachingSuch research can contribute much-needed descriptive data about whatteachers actually do in teaching grammar and clarify the processes itinvolves it can provide a vivid portrait of both teachersrsquo action and theirthinking that can serve as a catalyst in enabling teachers to examine theirown grammar teaching practices and it can contribute to the develop-ment of more sophisticated conceptualisations of L2 grammar teachingwhich will provide the basis for forms of teacher education and develop-ment more in tune with the psychological context of instruction

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank the teacher on whose work this paper is based for his cooperation throughoutthe study I am also grateful to Keith D Ballard Terry Crooks Sandra L McKayAnne B Smith and to two anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier draftsof this paper


THE AUTHOR

Simon Borg is assistant lecturer in English at the University of Malta He has workedas an EFL teacher educator in the United Kingdom and New Zealand and iscurrently completing a PhD in the personal theories of EFL teachers with specificreference to the teaching of grammar His main interests are process-orientedteacher education and grammar teaching

REFERENCES

Bassey M (1991) On the nature of research in education (Part 3) ResearchIntelligence 38 16ndash18

Batstone R (1994) Grammar Oxford Oxford University PressBeach S A (1994) Teacherrsquos theories and classroom practice Beliefs knowledge

or context Reading Psychology 15 189ndash196Berliner D C (1987) Ways of thinking about students and classrooms by more and

less experienced teachers In J Calderhead (Ed) Exploring teachersrsquo thinking (pp60ndash83) London Cassell

Brickhouse N W (1990) Teachersrsquo beliefs about the nature of science and theirrelationship to classroom practice Journal of Teacher Education 41 53ndash62

Briscoe C (1991) The dynamic interactions among beliefs role metaphors andteaching practices A case study of teacher change Science Education 75 185ndash199

Britten D (1985) Teacher training in ELT Language Teaching 18 112ndash128 220ndash238

Brookhart S M amp Freeman D J (1992) Characteristics of entering teachercandidates Review of Educational Research 62 37ndash60

Brown D amp Wendel R (1993) An examination of first-year teachersrsquo beliefs aboutlesson planning Action in Teacher Education 15 63

Burns A (1992) Teacher beliefs and their influence on classroom practice Prospect7 56ndash66

Burns A (1996) Starting all over again From teaching adults to teaching beginnersIn D Freeman amp J C Richards (Eds) Teacher learning in language teaching (pp154ndash177) Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Bygate M Tonkyn A amp Williams E (Eds) (1994) Grammar and the languageteacher London Prentice Hall International

Calderhead J (1981) Simulated recall A method for research on teaching BritishJournal of Educational Psychology 51 211ndash217

Carlgren I amp Lindblad S (1991) On teachersrsquo practical reasoning and profes-sional knowledge Considering conceptions of context in teachersrsquo thinkingTeaching and Teacher Education 7 507ndash516

Carter K amp Doyle W (1987) Teachersrsquo knowledge structures and comprehensionprocesses In J Calderhead (Ed) Exploring teachersrsquo thinking (pp 147ndash160)London Cassell

Clark C M (1986) Ten years of conceptual development in research on teacherthinking In M Ben-Peretz R Bromme amp R Halkes (Eds) Advances of research onteacher thinking (pp 7ndash20) Lisse Netherlands Swets amp Zeitlinger

Clark C M amp Peterson P L (1986) Teachersrsquo thought processes In M CWittrock (Ed) Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed pp 255ndash296) New YorkMacmillan

Crawley F E amp Salyer B A (1995) Origins of life science teachersrsquo beliefsunderlying curriculum reform in Texas Science Education 79 611ndash635

Cronin-Jones L L (1991) Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curricu-

34 TESOL QUARTERLY

lum implementation Two case studies Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28235ndash250

Delamont S (1992) Fieldwork in educational settings Methods pitfalls and perspectivesLondon Falmer Press

Dirkx J M amp Spurgin M E (1992) Implicit theories of adult basic educationteachers How their beliefs about students shape classroom practice Adult BasicEducation 2 20ndash41

Doolittle S A Dodds P amp Placek J H (1993) Persistence of beliefs aboutteaching during formal training of preservice teachers Journal of Teaching inPhysical Education 12 355ndash365

Ellis R (1994) The study of second language acquisition Oxford Oxford UniversityPress

Fenstermacher G D (1986) Philosophy of research on teaching Three aspects InM C Wittrock (Ed) Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed pp 37ndash49) NewYork Macmillan

Goodman J (1988) Constructing a practical philosophy of teaching A study ofpreservice teachersrsquo professional perspectives Teaching and Teacher Education 4121ndash37

Grossman P M Wilson S M amp Shulman L S (1989) Teachers of substanceSubject matter knowledge for teaching In M C Reynolds (Ed) Knowledge base forthe beginning teacher (pp 23ndash36) Oxford Pergamon Press

Grotjahn R (1987) On the methodological basis of introspective methods InC Faerch amp G Kasper (Eds) Introspection in second language research (pp 54ndash81)Clevedon England Multilingual Matters

Johnson K E (1994) The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of preserviceEnglish as a second language teachers Teaching and Teacher Education 10 439ndash452

Kagan D M (1992) Implications of research on teacher belief EducationalPsychologist 27 65ndash90

Kinzer C K (1988) Instructional frameworks and instructional choices Compari-sons between preservice and inservice teachers Journal of Reading Behaviour 20357ndash377

Konopak B C amp Williams N L (1994) Elementary teachersrsquo beliefs and decisionsabout vocabulary learning and instruction Yearbook of the National ReadingConference 43 485

Kvale S (1996) InterViews An introduction to qualitative research interviewing ThousandOaks CA Sage

Miles M B amp Huberman A M (1994) Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed) LondonSage

Munby H (1982) The place of teachersrsquo beliefs in research on teacher thinking anddecision making and an alternative methodology Instructional Science 11 201ndash225

Munby H (1983 April) A qualitative study of teachersrsquo beliefs and principles Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Associa-tion Montreal Canada

Olson J R amp Singer M (1994) Examining teacher beliefs reflective change andthe teaching of reading Reading Research and Instruction 34 97ndash110

Pajares M F (1992) Teachersrsquo beliefs and educational research Cleaning up amessy construct Review of Educational Research 62 307ndash332

Posner G J Strike K A Hewson P W amp Gertzog W A (1982) Accommodationof a scientific conception Toward a theory of conceptual change ScientificEducation 66 211ndash288


Qualitative Solutions and Research Pty (1995) QSR NUDIST (Version 304)[Computer software] London Sage

Smith D B (1996) Teacher decision making in the adult ESL classroom InD Freeman amp J C Richards (Eds) Teacher learning in language teaching (pp 197ndash216) Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Tabachnick B R amp Zeichner K M (1986) Teacher beliefs and classroombehaviours Some teacher responses to inconsistency In M Ben-Peretz RBromme amp R Halkes (Eds) Advances of research on teacher thinking (pp 84ndash96)Lisse Netherlands Swets amp Zeitlinger

Taylor P H (1987) Implicit theories In M J Dunkin (Ed) The internationalencyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (pp 477ndash482) Oxford PergamonPress

Tesch R (1990) Qualitative research Analysis types and software tools London FalmerPress

Weinstein C S (1990) Prospective elementary teachersrsquo beliefs about teachingImplications for teacher education Teaching and Teacher Education 6 279ndash290

Wilson E K Konopak B C amp Readence J E (1992) Examining content area andreading beliefs decisions and instruction A case study of an English teacherYearbook of the National Reading Conference 41 475ndash482

Woods D (1996) Teacher cognition in language teaching Cambridge CambridgeUniversity Press

Woods P (1986) Inside schools Ethnography in educational research London Routledge

APPENDIX A

Preobservation InterviewSection 1 Education1 What do you recall about your experiences of learning English at school

bull What approaches were usedbull Was there any formal analysis of language

2 Did you study any foreign languages What do you recall about these lessonsbull What kinds of methods were usedbull Do you recall whether you enjoyed such lessons or not

3 What about postsecondary education University Did the study of language play any rolethere

4 Do you feel that your own education as a student has had any influence on the way you teachtoday

Section 2 Entry Into the Profession and Development as a Teacher1 How and why did you become an EFL teacher

bull What recollections do you have about your earliest teaching experiencesbull Were these particularly positive or negativebull What kinds of teaching methods and materials did you use

2 Tell me about your formal teacher training experiencesbull Did they promote a particular way of teachingbull Did they encourage participants to approach grammar in any particular waybull Which aspect(s) of the course(s) did you find most memorable

3 What have the greatest influences on your development as a teacher been

36 TESOL QUARTERLY

Section 3 Reflections on Teaching1 What do you feel the most satisfying aspect of teaching EFL is and what is the hardest part

of the job2 What do you feel your strengths as an EFL teacher are and your weaknesses3 Can you describe one particularly good experience you have had as an EFL teacher and one

particularly bad one What is your idea of a ldquosuccessfulrdquo lesson4 Do you have any preferences in terms of the types of students you like to teach5 What about the students Do they generally have any preferences about the kind of work

they like to do in their lessons

Section 4 The School1 Does the school you work for promote any particular style of teaching2 Are there any restrictions on the kinds of materials you use or on the content and

organisation of your lessons3 Do students come here expecting a particular type of language course

APPENDIX B

Extract From an Analytic Memo for One LessonObservation data were transcribed and analysed after each lesson Key episodes were identifiedand a list of questions generated by these episodes compiled Questions were collated bycategory and summarised in analytic memos In the extract below the terms in italics are thecategories that emerged from the lesson on which the memo was based1 The use of metalanguage The teacher seems to expect a basic metalanguage from the students

(ldquoWhat kind of word are you looking for when you use this cluerdquo [verb]) but does notassume too much (ldquoWhen I say infinitive can you give me another examplerdquo) How does hefeel about the use of grammatical metalanguage Does he see any purpose in gettingstudents to develop their own metalanguage

2 Analysis of structure The teacher gets the students to analyse the structure of grammaticalitems (eg ldquoIf I had two wishes what would they berdquo = If + past + would) What is theteacherrsquos rationale for getting students to conduct such analyses How does he feel thishelps the language learning process

3 The teacher seems to imply that grammar books oversimplify complex issues Is this what theteacher believes What are the teacherrsquos attitudes to grammar books Is he suggesting thatstudents should be exposed to the complexities of English grammar in full (ldquothere are about76 conditionals in Englishrdquo)

4 What are the teacherrsquos beliefs about grammar practice the role it plays in learning and the wayit should be handled What about transformation exercisesmdashldquoWhat is itmdashTell me what itisrdquo What about ldquoIf you want to try to use the information on the boardrdquo (the informationwas that describing the structure of a conditional sentence like If I was a butterfly I would fly)

5 The teacher elicits rules for the use of interrogative forms and the word order associated withthem by giving students a few examples then getting them to complete an incompletesentence describing the rule What is the teacherrsquos rationale here How does he feel aboutgiving rules What about ldquo90rdquo or ldquonormallyrdquo rules

6 What about independent language research work outside the classroom How does theteacher see this as fitting into his overall approach to teaching How does he see it ashelping the students


APPENDIX C

Schedule for Postobservation InterviewsThe schedule was divided into 12 areas of practice that emerged from the analysis of the analyticmemos based on the observation data These issues were discussed over the course of twointerviews

1 Accuracy and fluency 7 Small-group grammar tasks2 Handling studentsrsquo errors 8 Grammatical terminology3 Teacher role in grammar teaching 9 Analysis of grammar4 Studentsrsquo expectations and needs 10 Grammar books5 Grammar rules 11 Grammar practice6 Selecting grammar content 12 Studentsrsquo L1 and translation

Each section of the interview schedule contained a lesson episode that prompted me toinvestigate the area together with the questions the episode generated Below is an example

Studentsrsquo L1 and TranslationThe teacher calls on students to refer to their L1 many times during the lessonsS3 says she has a problem using a particular structure ldquoHave been continuous present is itrdquo

ldquoThe name doesnrsquot matterrdquo says the teacher and he proceeds to write the following on theboard


The teacher asks ldquoCan you complete the sentencerdquo S2 says ldquoI have been here for 2 daysrdquoldquoIn many European languagesrdquo the teacher explains ldquoa present tense is used where in Englishthe present perfect is used We can say lsquoI am here for 2 weeksrsquo but it has a different meaningit means lsquonow and in the futurersquordquo (EO198ndash133)

bull What contribution to EFL can the studentsrsquo L1 makebull With specific reference to grammar how does reference to the L1 help

During the same lesson when he tells them to analyse the transcript the teacher asks thestudents to tick grammatical structures that are ldquothe same in my languagerdquo or to put a questionmark next to items that look ldquovery different to my languagerdquo Students are asked to writetranslations of words they do not know The use of bilingual dictionaries is encouraged

bull What beliefs underlie the teacherrsquos position here

APPENDIX D

Structured List of CategoriesThe experiential category includes references to educational and professional experiences inthe teacherrsquos life that had some bearing on an understanding of his current grammar teachingpractices The pedagogical category includes the teacherrsquos beliefs about a range of issues in L2learning and teaching The contextual category includes references the teacher made to theeffect of external (eg time) and internal (eg studentsrsquo understanding) contextual factors onhis practice1 EXPERIENTIAL

11 General education111 Languages

1111 First language1112 Foreign language

112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY

12 Teacher education121 Joining122 Certificatediploma

13 Teaching experience131 Early132 Ongoing133 As basis of beliefs

2 PEDAGOGICAL21 Language22 Language learning

221 Facilitating222 Hindering223 Accuracy and fluency

2231 Rationale behind accuracy work2232 Rationale behind fluency work2233 Relationship between accuracy and fluency work2234 Studentsrsquo attitudes towards accuracy and fluency work2235 Teacherrsquos role in accuracy and fluency work2236 Combining accuracy and fluency work2237 Use of L1 in accuracy work

224 Approach2241 Communicative language learning2242 Justifying approach to L2 teaching

225 Materials226 Skills227 Planning228 Mother tongue

23 Grammar231 Techniques232 Rules233 Books234 Terminology235 Studentsrsquo errors236 Timing237 Pacing the lesson

24 Students241 Experience242 Expectations243 Needs and wants244 Rapport with245 Likes and dislikes246 Learning styles247 Fears

25 Language teacher251 Role252 Characteristics

3 CONTEXTUAL31 Time32 Students

321 Readiness for learning322 Problems323 Requests324 Level and age

10 TESOL QUARTERLY

to L2 teachersrsquo perceptions of the role of grammar teaching1 in theirwork and to the manner in which instructional decisions regardinggrammar teaching are informed by teachersrsquo personal pedagogicalsystems Given the central position grammar has occupied in studies ofL2 acquisition (see Ellis 1994 for a review) and in discussions of L2teaching methodology (eg Batstone 1994 Bygate Tonkyn amp Williams1994) the lack of attention to the cognitive bases of teachersrsquo work ingrammar teaching represents a gap in the research agenda for L2teaching

Research into the psychological context (Munby 1983) of grammarteaching is also particularly important in view of the inconclusive natureof L2 acquisition studies of the best way to teach grammar L2 teachershave been offered a range of pedagogical options yet a major review ofthese has suggested that ldquoit is probably premature to reach any firmconclusions regarding what type of formal instruction works bestrdquo (Ellis1994 p 646) The teaching of grammar in the absence of well-foundedguidelines is like a landscape without bearings and research intoteachersrsquo personal pedagogical systems suggests that to cope in such ill-defined situations ldquoteachers create and internalise their own mapsrdquo(Kagan 1992 p 80) This article explores the nature of the maps L2teachers utilise in determining the role and nature of grammar teachingin their classroom practice

PURPOSE AND CONTEXT

The initial aim of the study was to provide an emic perspective on themanner in which an L2 teacherrsquos personal pedagogical system informedhis approach to grammar teaching This involved describing how theteacher approached grammar in his work and exploring the rationalebehind his decisions to do so During the course of the study however itbecame clear that the teacherrsquos pedagogical system could not be ad-equately understood without reference to the factors that influenced itsdevelopment and application and a focus on these factors was conse-quently added to my research agenda

The fieldwork was conducted in an English language institute inMalta a Mediterranean centre for TEFL that caters each year to over30000 students of a variety of European nationalities The schoolassigned students to levels (ranging from elementary to high intermedi-ate) using an in-house placement test and students on standard general

1 Throughout this article grammar teaching refers to instruction designed to enhancestudentsrsquo awareness of the morphosyntactic features of a language



RESEARCH FRAMEWORK



12 TESOL QUARTERLY



















14 TESOL QUARTERLY




Error Analysis













16 TESOL QUARTERLY














18 TESOL QUARTERLY

















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY















RESEARCH FRAMEWORK



12 TESOL QUARTERLY



















14 TESOL QUARTERLY




Error Analysis













16 TESOL QUARTERLY














18 TESOL QUARTERLY

















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY













12 TESOL QUARTERLY



















14 TESOL QUARTERLY




Error Analysis













16 TESOL QUARTERLY














18 TESOL QUARTERLY

















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY

























14 TESOL QUARTERLY




Error Analysis













16 TESOL QUARTERLY














18 TESOL QUARTERLY

















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY























16 TESOL QUARTERLY














18 TESOL QUARTERLY

















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY




















18 TESOL QUARTERLY

















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY




















20 TESOL QUARTERLY


















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY




















Grammar Rules10




22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY













22 TESOL QUARTERLY

















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY





















24 TESOL QUARTERLY




Practising Grammar












26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY





















26 TESOL QUARTERLY















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY





















28 TESOL QUARTERLY

















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY


















30 TESOL QUARTERLY








IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY
















IMPLICATIONS



32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY













32 TESOL QUARTERLY





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY














THE AUTHOR


REFERENCES




















34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY













34 TESOL QUARTERLY































APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY























APPENDIX A










36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY













36 TESOL QUARTERLY







APPENDIX B









APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY














APPENDIX C











APPENDIX D




112 University

38 TESOL QUARTERLY













38 TESOL QUARTERLY













Teachers' Pedagogical Systems and Grammar Teaching: A ...

Documents

Transcript of Teachers' Pedagogical Systems and Grammar Teaching: A ...